Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-06-06 Thread Gerd Hoffmann 
On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 13:56 +0530, Kirti Wankhede wrote:
> 
> On 6/2/2017 2:08 PM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> > 
> > > struct vfio_vgpu_surface_info {
> > > __u64 start;
> > > __u32 width;
> > > __u32 height;
> > > __u32 stride;
> > > __u32 size;
> > > __u32 x_pos;
> > > __u32 y_pos;
> > > __u32 padding;
> > > /* Only used when VFIO_VGPU_SURFACE_DMABUF_* flags set */
> > > __u64 drm_format_mod;
> > > __u32 drm_format;
> > 
> > Why for dmabufs only?  Shouldn't the region specify the format
> > too? 
> > Even in case you are using a fixed one (say
> > DRM_FORMAT_XRGB) you
> > can explicitly say so in drm_format (and set drm_format_mod to
> > zero).
> > 
> 
> Definitions for PIXMAN formats and DRM formats are different. I think
> we need a flag to specify the format of surface that vendor driver is
> going to provide, PIXMAN or DRM.

No need to put that into the ioctl interface.  First, the kernel should
not worry about what userspace uses to process the data.  Second (most)
drm formats can trivially be mapped into pixman formats.

For example: PIXMAN_x8r8g8b8 (little endian) == DRM_FORMAT_XRGB

> If surface is provided through region in PIXMAN format, existing
> functions in QEMU can be used to get format from bpp value,
> qemu_default_pixman_format(). Similarly, display surface can be
> updated
> by QEMU using qemu_create_displaysurface_from() from mmaped region.

A thin wrapper which accepts a struct vfio_vgpu_surface_info and
translates that into a qemu_create_displaysurface_from() call should be
pretty small.

cheers,
  Gerd

Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-06-06 Thread Gerd Hoffmann 
On Mon, 2017-06-05 at 13:56 +0530, Kirti Wankhede wrote:
> 
> On 6/2/2017 2:08 PM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> > 
> > > struct vfio_vgpu_surface_info {
> > > __u64 start;
> > > __u32 width;
> > > __u32 height;
> > > __u32 stride;
> > > __u32 size;
> > > __u32 x_pos;
> > > __u32 y_pos;
> > > __u32 padding;
> > > /* Only used when VFIO_VGPU_SURFACE_DMABUF_* flags set */
> > > __u64 drm_format_mod;
> > > __u32 drm_format;
> > 
> > Why for dmabufs only?  Shouldn't the region specify the format
> > too? 
> > Even in case you are using a fixed one (say
> > DRM_FORMAT_XRGB) you
> > can explicitly say so in drm_format (and set drm_format_mod to
> > zero).
> > 
> 
> Definitions for PIXMAN formats and DRM formats are different. I think
> we need a flag to specify the format of surface that vendor driver is
> going to provide, PIXMAN or DRM.

No need to put that into the ioctl interface.  First, the kernel should
not worry about what userspace uses to process the data.  Second (most)
drm formats can trivially be mapped into pixman formats.

For example: PIXMAN_x8r8g8b8 (little endian) == DRM_FORMAT_XRGB

> If surface is provided through region in PIXMAN format, existing
> functions in QEMU can be used to get format from bpp value,
> qemu_default_pixman_format(). Similarly, display surface can be
> updated
> by QEMU using qemu_create_displaysurface_from() from mmaped region.

A thin wrapper which accepts a struct vfio_vgpu_surface_info and
translates that into a qemu_create_displaysurface_from() call should be
pretty small.

cheers,
  Gerd

Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-06-05 Thread Kirti Wankhede 


On 6/2/2017 2:08 PM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> 
>> struct vfio_vgpu_surface_info {
>> __u64 start;
>> __u32 width;
>> __u32 height;
>> __u32 stride;
>> __u32 size;
>> __u32 x_pos;
>> __u32 y_pos;
>> __u32 padding;
>> /* Only used when VFIO_VGPU_SURFACE_DMABUF_* flags set */
>> __u64 drm_format_mod;
>> __u32 drm_format;
> 
> Why for dmabufs only?  Shouldn't the region specify the format too? 
> Even in case you are using a fixed one (say DRM_FORMAT_XRGB) you
> can explicitly say so in drm_format (and set drm_format_mod to zero).
> 

Definitions for PIXMAN formats and DRM formats are different. I think
we need a flag to specify the format of surface that vendor driver is
going to provide, PIXMAN or DRM.
If surface is provided through region in PIXMAN format, existing
functions in QEMU can be used to get format from bpp value,
qemu_default_pixman_format(). Similarly, display surface can be updated
by QEMU using qemu_create_displaysurface_from() from mmaped region.

Thanks,
Kirti

> cheers,
>   Gerd
>

Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-06-05 Thread Kirti Wankhede 


On 6/2/2017 2:08 PM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
> 
>> struct vfio_vgpu_surface_info {
>> __u64 start;
>> __u32 width;
>> __u32 height;
>> __u32 stride;
>> __u32 size;
>> __u32 x_pos;
>> __u32 y_pos;
>> __u32 padding;
>> /* Only used when VFIO_VGPU_SURFACE_DMABUF_* flags set */
>> __u64 drm_format_mod;
>> __u32 drm_format;
> 
> Why for dmabufs only?  Shouldn't the region specify the format too? 
> Even in case you are using a fixed one (say DRM_FORMAT_XRGB) you
> can explicitly say so in drm_format (and set drm_format_mod to zero).
> 

Definitions for PIXMAN formats and DRM formats are different. I think
we need a flag to specify the format of surface that vendor driver is
going to provide, PIXMAN or DRM.
If surface is provided through region in PIXMAN format, existing
functions in QEMU can be used to get format from bpp value,
qemu_default_pixman_format(). Similarly, display surface can be updated
by QEMU using qemu_create_displaysurface_from() from mmaped region.

Thanks,
Kirti

> cheers,
>   Gerd
>

Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-06-02 Thread Gerd Hoffmann 

> struct vfio_vgpu_surface_info {
> __u64 start;
> __u32 width;
> __u32 height;
> __u32 stride;
> __u32 size;
> __u32 x_pos;
> __u32 y_pos;
> __u32 padding;
> /* Only used when VFIO_VGPU_SURFACE_DMABUF_* flags set */
> __u64 drm_format_mod;
> __u32 drm_format;

Why for dmabufs only?  Shouldn't the region specify the format too? 
Even in case you are using a fixed one (say DRM_FORMAT_XRGB) you
can explicitly say so in drm_format (and set drm_format_mod to zero).

cheers,
  Gerd

Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-06-02 Thread Gerd Hoffmann 

> struct vfio_vgpu_surface_info {
> __u64 start;
> __u32 width;
> __u32 height;
> __u32 stride;
> __u32 size;
> __u32 x_pos;
> __u32 y_pos;
> __u32 padding;
> /* Only used when VFIO_VGPU_SURFACE_DMABUF_* flags set */
> __u64 drm_format_mod;
> __u32 drm_format;

Why for dmabufs only?  Shouldn't the region specify the format too? 
Even in case you are using a fixed one (say DRM_FORMAT_XRGB) you
can explicitly say so in drm_format (and set drm_format_mod to zero).

cheers,
  Gerd

Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-06-01 Thread Kirti Wankhede 


On 6/1/2017 10:08 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 03:01:28 +
> "Chen, Xiaoguang" <xiaoguang.c...@intel.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Kirti,
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Kirti Wankhede [mailto:kwankh...@nvidia.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2017 1:23 AM
>>> To: Chen, Xiaoguang <xiaoguang.c...@intel.com>; Gerd Hoffmann
>>> <kra...@redhat.com>; alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk;
>>> intel-...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
>>> zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan <zhiyuan...@intel.com>; intel-gvt-
>>> d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A <zhi.a.w...@intel.com>; Tian, Kevin
>>> <kevin.t...@intel.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf 
>>> operations
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/31/2017 11:48 AM, Chen, Xiaoguang wrote:  
>>>> Hi,
>>>>  
>>>>> -Original Message-
>>>>> From: Gerd Hoffmann [mailto:kra...@redhat.com]
>>>>> Sent: Monday, May 29, 2017 3:20 PM
>>>>> To: Chen, Xiaoguang <xiaoguang.c...@intel.com>;
>>>>> alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk; intel-
>>>>> g...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
>>>>> zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan <zhiyuan...@intel.com>;
>>>>> intel-gvt- d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A
>>>>> <zhi.a.w...@intel.com>; Tian, Kevin <kevin.t...@intel.com>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf
>>>>> operations
>>>>>  
>>>>>> +struct vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info {
>>>>>> +__u32 argsz;
>>>>>> +__u32 flags;
>>>>>> +struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>>>>> +__s32 fd;
>>>>>> +__u32 pad;
>>>>>> +};  
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmm, now you have argsz and flags twice in vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info ...
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we should have something like this:
>>>>>
>>>>> struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info {
>>>>> __u64 start;
>>>>> __u64 drm_format_mod;
>>>>> __u32 drm_format;
>>>>> __u32 width;
>>>>> __u32 height;
>>>>> __u32 stride;
>>>>> __u32 size;
>>>>> __u32 x_pos;
>>>>> __u32 y_pos;
>>>>>__u32 padding;
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> struct vfio_vgpu_query_plane {
>>>>>   __u32 argsz;
>>>>>   __u32 flags;
>>>>>   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>>>>__u32 plane_id;
>>>>>__u32 padding;
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> struct vfio_vgpu_create_dmabuf {
>>>>>   __u32 argsz;
>>>>>   __u32 flags;
>>>>>   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>>>>__u32 plane_id;
>>>>>__s32 fd;
>>>>> };  
>>>> Good suggestion will apply in the next version.
>>>> Thanks for review :)
>>>>  
>>>
>>> Can you define what are the expected values of 'flags' would be?  
>> Flags is not used in this case.  It is defined to follow the rules of vfio 
>> ioctls.
> 
> An important note about flags, the vendor driver must validate it.  If
> they don't and the user passes an arbitrary value there, then we have a
> backwards compatibility issue with ever attempting to use the flags
> field.  The user passing in a flag unknown to the vendor driver should
> return an -EINVAL response.  In this case, we haven't defined any
> flags, so the vendor driver needs to force the user to pass zero.

There are two ways QEMU can get surface for console:
1. adding a region using region capability
2. dmabuf

In both the above case surface parameters need to be queried from vendor
driver are same. The structure would be :

struct vfio_vgpu_surface_info {
__u64 start;
__u32 width;
__u32 height;
__u32 stride;
__u32 size;
__u32 x_pos;
__u32 y_pos;
__u32 padding;
/* Only used when VFIO_VGPU_SURFACE_DMABUF_* flags set */
__u64 drm_format_mod;
__u32 drm_format;
};

We can use one ioctl to query surface information from vendor driver,
structure would look like:

struct vfio_vgpu_get_surface_info{
__u32 argsz;
__u32 flags;
#define VFIO_VGPU_SURFACE_DMABUF_CREATE (1 << 0) /* Create dmabuf */
#define VFIO_VGPU_SURFACE_DMABUF_QUERY  (1 << 1) /* Query surface info
for dmabuf */
#define VFIO_VGPU_SURFACE_REGION_QUERY  (1 << 2) /* Query surface info
for REGION type  */
struct vfio_vgpu_surface_info surface;
__u32 plane_id;
__s32 fd;
};

#define VFIO_DEVICE_SURFACE_INFO _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 15)

Vendor driver should return -EINVAL, if that type of query is not
supported.

I would like to design this interface to support both type, region cap
and dmabuf.

Thanks,
Kirti

Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-06-01 Thread Kirti Wankhede 


On 6/1/2017 10:08 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 03:01:28 +
> "Chen, Xiaoguang"  wrote:
> 
>> Hi Kirti,
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Kirti Wankhede [mailto:kwankh...@nvidia.com]
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2017 1:23 AM
>>> To: Chen, Xiaoguang ; Gerd Hoffmann
>>> ; alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk;
>>> intel-...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
>>> zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan ; intel-gvt-
>>> d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A ; Tian, Kevin
>>> 
>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf 
>>> operations
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/31/2017 11:48 AM, Chen, Xiaoguang wrote:  
>>>> Hi,
>>>>  
>>>>> -Original Message-
>>>>> From: Gerd Hoffmann [mailto:kra...@redhat.com]
>>>>> Sent: Monday, May 29, 2017 3:20 PM
>>>>> To: Chen, Xiaoguang ;
>>>>> alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk; intel-
>>>>> g...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
>>>>> zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan ;
>>>>> intel-gvt- d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A
>>>>> ; Tian, Kevin 
>>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf
>>>>> operations
>>>>>  
>>>>>> +struct vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info {
>>>>>> +__u32 argsz;
>>>>>> +__u32 flags;
>>>>>> +struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>>>>> +__s32 fd;
>>>>>> +__u32 pad;
>>>>>> +};  
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmm, now you have argsz and flags twice in vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info ...
>>>>>
>>>>> I think we should have something like this:
>>>>>
>>>>> struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info {
>>>>> __u64 start;
>>>>> __u64 drm_format_mod;
>>>>> __u32 drm_format;
>>>>> __u32 width;
>>>>> __u32 height;
>>>>> __u32 stride;
>>>>> __u32 size;
>>>>> __u32 x_pos;
>>>>> __u32 y_pos;
>>>>>__u32 padding;
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> struct vfio_vgpu_query_plane {
>>>>>   __u32 argsz;
>>>>>   __u32 flags;
>>>>>   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>>>>__u32 plane_id;
>>>>>__u32 padding;
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> struct vfio_vgpu_create_dmabuf {
>>>>>   __u32 argsz;
>>>>>   __u32 flags;
>>>>>   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>>>>__u32 plane_id;
>>>>>__s32 fd;
>>>>> };  
>>>> Good suggestion will apply in the next version.
>>>> Thanks for review :)
>>>>  
>>>
>>> Can you define what are the expected values of 'flags' would be?  
>> Flags is not used in this case.  It is defined to follow the rules of vfio 
>> ioctls.
> 
> An important note about flags, the vendor driver must validate it.  If
> they don't and the user passes an arbitrary value there, then we have a
> backwards compatibility issue with ever attempting to use the flags
> field.  The user passing in a flag unknown to the vendor driver should
> return an -EINVAL response.  In this case, we haven't defined any
> flags, so the vendor driver needs to force the user to pass zero.

There are two ways QEMU can get surface for console:
1. adding a region using region capability
2. dmabuf

In both the above case surface parameters need to be queried from vendor
driver are same. The structure would be :

struct vfio_vgpu_surface_info {
__u64 start;
__u32 width;
__u32 height;
__u32 stride;
__u32 size;
__u32 x_pos;
__u32 y_pos;
__u32 padding;
/* Only used when VFIO_VGPU_SURFACE_DMABUF_* flags set */
__u64 drm_format_mod;
__u32 drm_format;
};

We can use one ioctl to query surface information from vendor driver,
structure would look like:

struct vfio_vgpu_get_surface_info{
__u32 argsz;
__u32 flags;
#define VFIO_VGPU_SURFACE_DMABUF_CREATE (1 << 0) /* Create dmabuf */
#define VFIO_VGPU_SURFACE_DMABUF_QUERY  (1 << 1) /* Query surface info
for dmabuf */
#define VFIO_VGPU_SURFACE_REGION_QUERY  (1 << 2) /* Query surface info
for REGION type  */
struct vfio_vgpu_surface_info surface;
__u32 plane_id;
__s32 fd;
};

#define VFIO_DEVICE_SURFACE_INFO _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 15)

Vendor driver should return -EINVAL, if that type of query is not
supported.

I would like to design this interface to support both type, region cap
and dmabuf.

Thanks,
Kirti

Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-06-01 Thread Alex Williamson 
On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 03:01:28 +
"Chen, Xiaoguang" <xiaoguang.c...@intel.com> wrote:

> Hi Kirti,
> 
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Kirti Wankhede [mailto:kwankh...@nvidia.com]
> >Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2017 1:23 AM
> >To: Chen, Xiaoguang <xiaoguang.c...@intel.com>; Gerd Hoffmann
> ><kra...@redhat.com>; alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk;
> >intel-...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> >zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan <zhiyuan...@intel.com>; intel-gvt-
> >d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A <zhi.a.w...@intel.com>; Tian, Kevin
> ><kevin.t...@intel.com>
> >Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations
> >
> >
> >
> >On 5/31/2017 11:48 AM, Chen, Xiaoguang wrote:  
> >> Hi,
> >>  
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: Gerd Hoffmann [mailto:kra...@redhat.com]
> >>> Sent: Monday, May 29, 2017 3:20 PM
> >>> To: Chen, Xiaoguang <xiaoguang.c...@intel.com>;
> >>> alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk; intel-
> >>> g...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> >>> zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan <zhiyuan...@intel.com>;
> >>> intel-gvt- d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A
> >>> <zhi.a.w...@intel.com>; Tian, Kevin <kevin.t...@intel.com>
> >>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf
> >>> operations
> >>>  
> >>>> +struct vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info {
> >>>> +__u32 argsz;
> >>>> +__u32 flags;
> >>>> +struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
> >>>> +__s32 fd;
> >>>> +__u32 pad;
> >>>> +};  
> >>>
> >>> Hmm, now you have argsz and flags twice in vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info ...
> >>>
> >>> I think we should have something like this:
> >>>
> >>> struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info {
> >>> __u64 start;
> >>> __u64 drm_format_mod;
> >>> __u32 drm_format;
> >>> __u32 width;
> >>> __u32 height;
> >>> __u32 stride;
> >>> __u32 size;
> >>> __u32 x_pos;
> >>> __u32 y_pos;
> >>>__u32 padding;
> >>> };
> >>>
> >>> struct vfio_vgpu_query_plane {
> >>>   __u32 argsz;
> >>>   __u32 flags;
> >>>   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
> >>>__u32 plane_id;
> >>>__u32 padding;
> >>> };
> >>>
> >>> struct vfio_vgpu_create_dmabuf {
> >>>   __u32 argsz;
> >>>   __u32 flags;
> >>>   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
> >>>__u32 plane_id;
> >>>__s32 fd;
> >>> };  
> >> Good suggestion will apply in the next version.
> >> Thanks for review :)
> >>  
> >
> >Can you define what are the expected values of 'flags' would be?  
> Flags is not used in this case.  It is defined to follow the rules of vfio 
> ioctls.

An important note about flags, the vendor driver must validate it.  If
they don't and the user passes an arbitrary value there, then we have a
backwards compatibility issue with ever attempting to use the flags
field.  The user passing in a flag unknown to the vendor driver should
return an -EINVAL response.  In this case, we haven't defined any
flags, so the vendor driver needs to force the user to pass zero.
Thanks,

Alex

Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-06-01 Thread Alex Williamson 
On Thu, 1 Jun 2017 03:01:28 +
"Chen, Xiaoguang"  wrote:

> Hi Kirti,
> 
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Kirti Wankhede [mailto:kwankh...@nvidia.com]
> >Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2017 1:23 AM
> >To: Chen, Xiaoguang ; Gerd Hoffmann
> >; alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk;
> >intel-...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> >zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan ; intel-gvt-
> >d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A ; Tian, Kevin
> >
> >Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations
> >
> >
> >
> >On 5/31/2017 11:48 AM, Chen, Xiaoguang wrote:  
> >> Hi,
> >>  
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: Gerd Hoffmann [mailto:kra...@redhat.com]
> >>> Sent: Monday, May 29, 2017 3:20 PM
> >>> To: Chen, Xiaoguang ;
> >>> alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk; intel-
> >>> g...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
> >>> zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan ;
> >>> intel-gvt- d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A
> >>> ; Tian, Kevin 
> >>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf
> >>> operations
> >>>  
> >>>> +struct vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info {
> >>>> +__u32 argsz;
> >>>> +__u32 flags;
> >>>> +struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
> >>>> +__s32 fd;
> >>>> +__u32 pad;
> >>>> +};  
> >>>
> >>> Hmm, now you have argsz and flags twice in vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info ...
> >>>
> >>> I think we should have something like this:
> >>>
> >>> struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info {
> >>> __u64 start;
> >>> __u64 drm_format_mod;
> >>> __u32 drm_format;
> >>> __u32 width;
> >>> __u32 height;
> >>> __u32 stride;
> >>> __u32 size;
> >>> __u32 x_pos;
> >>> __u32 y_pos;
> >>>__u32 padding;
> >>> };
> >>>
> >>> struct vfio_vgpu_query_plane {
> >>>   __u32 argsz;
> >>>   __u32 flags;
> >>>   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
> >>>__u32 plane_id;
> >>>__u32 padding;
> >>> };
> >>>
> >>> struct vfio_vgpu_create_dmabuf {
> >>>   __u32 argsz;
> >>>   __u32 flags;
> >>>   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
> >>>__u32 plane_id;
> >>>__s32 fd;
> >>> };  
> >> Good suggestion will apply in the next version.
> >> Thanks for review :)
> >>  
> >
> >Can you define what are the expected values of 'flags' would be?  
> Flags is not used in this case.  It is defined to follow the rules of vfio 
> ioctls.

An important note about flags, the vendor driver must validate it.  If
they don't and the user passes an arbitrary value there, then we have a
backwards compatibility issue with ever attempting to use the flags
field.  The user passing in a flag unknown to the vendor driver should
return an -EINVAL response.  In this case, we haven't defined any
flags, so the vendor driver needs to force the user to pass zero.
Thanks,

Alex

RE: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-05-31 Thread Chen, Xiaoguang 
Hi Kirti,

>-Original Message-
>From: Kirti Wankhede [mailto:kwankh...@nvidia.com]
>Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2017 1:23 AM
>To: Chen, Xiaoguang <xiaoguang.c...@intel.com>; Gerd Hoffmann
><kra...@redhat.com>; alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk;
>intel-...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
>zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan <zhiyuan...@intel.com>; intel-gvt-
>d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A <zhi.a.w...@intel.com>; Tian, Kevin
><kevin.t...@intel.com>
>Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations
>
>
>
>On 5/31/2017 11:48 AM, Chen, Xiaoguang wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Gerd Hoffmann [mailto:kra...@redhat.com]
>>> Sent: Monday, May 29, 2017 3:20 PM
>>> To: Chen, Xiaoguang <xiaoguang.c...@intel.com>;
>>> alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk; intel-
>>> g...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
>>> zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan <zhiyuan...@intel.com>;
>>> intel-gvt- d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A
>>> <zhi.a.w...@intel.com>; Tian, Kevin <kevin.t...@intel.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf
>>> operations
>>>
>>>> +struct vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info {
>>>> +  __u32 argsz;
>>>> +  __u32 flags;
>>>> +  struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>>> +  __s32 fd;
>>>> +  __u32 pad;
>>>> +};
>>>
>>> Hmm, now you have argsz and flags twice in vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info ...
>>>
>>> I think we should have something like this:
>>>
>>> struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info {
>>> __u64 start;
>>> __u64 drm_format_mod;
>>> __u32 drm_format;
>>> __u32 width;
>>> __u32 height;
>>> __u32 stride;
>>> __u32 size;
>>> __u32 x_pos;
>>> __u32 y_pos;
>>>__u32 padding;
>>> };
>>>
>>> struct vfio_vgpu_query_plane {
>>> __u32 argsz;
>>> __u32 flags;
>>> struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>>__u32 plane_id;
>>>__u32 padding;
>>> };
>>>
>>> struct vfio_vgpu_create_dmabuf {
>>> __u32 argsz;
>>> __u32 flags;
>>> struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>>__u32 plane_id;
>>>__s32 fd;
>>> };
>> Good suggestion will apply in the next version.
>> Thanks for review :)
>>
>
>Can you define what are the expected values of 'flags' would be?
Flags is not used in this case.  It is defined to follow the rules of vfio 
ioctls.

>
>Thanks,
>Kirti
>
>> Chenxg.
>>

RE: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-05-31 Thread Chen, Xiaoguang 
Hi Kirti,

>-Original Message-
>From: Kirti Wankhede [mailto:kwankh...@nvidia.com]
>Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2017 1:23 AM
>To: Chen, Xiaoguang ; Gerd Hoffmann
>; alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk;
>intel-...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
>zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan ; intel-gvt-
>d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A ; Tian, Kevin
>
>Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations
>
>
>
>On 5/31/2017 11:48 AM, Chen, Xiaoguang wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Gerd Hoffmann [mailto:kra...@redhat.com]
>>> Sent: Monday, May 29, 2017 3:20 PM
>>> To: Chen, Xiaoguang ;
>>> alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk; intel-
>>> g...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
>>> zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan ;
>>> intel-gvt- d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A
>>> ; Tian, Kevin 
>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf
>>> operations
>>>
>>>> +struct vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info {
>>>> +  __u32 argsz;
>>>> +  __u32 flags;
>>>> +  struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>>> +  __s32 fd;
>>>> +  __u32 pad;
>>>> +};
>>>
>>> Hmm, now you have argsz and flags twice in vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info ...
>>>
>>> I think we should have something like this:
>>>
>>> struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info {
>>> __u64 start;
>>> __u64 drm_format_mod;
>>> __u32 drm_format;
>>> __u32 width;
>>> __u32 height;
>>> __u32 stride;
>>> __u32 size;
>>> __u32 x_pos;
>>> __u32 y_pos;
>>>__u32 padding;
>>> };
>>>
>>> struct vfio_vgpu_query_plane {
>>> __u32 argsz;
>>> __u32 flags;
>>> struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>>__u32 plane_id;
>>>__u32 padding;
>>> };
>>>
>>> struct vfio_vgpu_create_dmabuf {
>>> __u32 argsz;
>>> __u32 flags;
>>> struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>>__u32 plane_id;
>>>__s32 fd;
>>> };
>> Good suggestion will apply in the next version.
>> Thanks for review :)
>>
>
>Can you define what are the expected values of 'flags' would be?
Flags is not used in this case.  It is defined to follow the rules of vfio 
ioctls.

>
>Thanks,
>Kirti
>
>> Chenxg.
>>

Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-05-31 Thread Kirti Wankhede 


On 5/31/2017 11:48 AM, Chen, Xiaoguang wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Gerd Hoffmann [mailto:kra...@redhat.com]
>> Sent: Monday, May 29, 2017 3:20 PM
>> To: Chen, Xiaoguang <xiaoguang.c...@intel.com>;
>> alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk; intel-
>> g...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
>> zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan <zhiyuan...@intel.com>; intel-gvt-
>> d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A <zhi.a.w...@intel.com>; Tian, Kevin
>> <kevin.t...@intel.com>
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations
>>
>>> +struct vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info {
>>> +   __u32 argsz;
>>> +   __u32 flags;
>>> +   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>> +   __s32 fd;
>>> +   __u32 pad;
>>> +};
>>
>> Hmm, now you have argsz and flags twice in vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info ...
>>
>> I think we should have something like this:
>>
>> struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info {
>> __u64 start;
>> __u64 drm_format_mod;
>> __u32 drm_format;
>> __u32 width;
>> __u32 height;
>> __u32 stride;
>> __u32 size;
>> __u32 x_pos;
>> __u32 y_pos;
>>__u32 padding;
>> };
>>
>> struct vfio_vgpu_query_plane {
>>  __u32 argsz;
>>  __u32 flags;
>>  struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>__u32 plane_id;
>>__u32 padding;
>> };
>>
>> struct vfio_vgpu_create_dmabuf {
>>  __u32 argsz;
>>  __u32 flags;
>>  struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>__u32 plane_id;
>>__s32 fd;
>> };
> Good suggestion will apply in the next version.
> Thanks for review :)
> 

Can you define what are the expected values of 'flags' would be?

Thanks,
Kirti

> Chenxg.
>

Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-05-31 Thread Kirti Wankhede 


On 5/31/2017 11:48 AM, Chen, Xiaoguang wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Gerd Hoffmann [mailto:kra...@redhat.com]
>> Sent: Monday, May 29, 2017 3:20 PM
>> To: Chen, Xiaoguang ;
>> alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk; intel-
>> g...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
>> zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan ; intel-gvt-
>> d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A ; Tian, Kevin
>> 
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations
>>
>>> +struct vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info {
>>> +   __u32 argsz;
>>> +   __u32 flags;
>>> +   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>> +   __s32 fd;
>>> +   __u32 pad;
>>> +};
>>
>> Hmm, now you have argsz and flags twice in vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info ...
>>
>> I think we should have something like this:
>>
>> struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info {
>> __u64 start;
>> __u64 drm_format_mod;
>> __u32 drm_format;
>> __u32 width;
>> __u32 height;
>> __u32 stride;
>> __u32 size;
>> __u32 x_pos;
>> __u32 y_pos;
>>__u32 padding;
>> };
>>
>> struct vfio_vgpu_query_plane {
>>  __u32 argsz;
>>  __u32 flags;
>>  struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>__u32 plane_id;
>>__u32 padding;
>> };
>>
>> struct vfio_vgpu_create_dmabuf {
>>  __u32 argsz;
>>  __u32 flags;
>>  struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>>__u32 plane_id;
>>__s32 fd;
>> };
> Good suggestion will apply in the next version.
> Thanks for review :)
> 

Can you define what are the expected values of 'flags' would be?

Thanks,
Kirti

> Chenxg.
>

RE: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-05-31 Thread Chen, Xiaoguang 
Hi,

>-Original Message-
>From: Gerd Hoffmann [mailto:kra...@redhat.com]
>Sent: Monday, May 29, 2017 3:20 PM
>To: Chen, Xiaoguang <xiaoguang.c...@intel.com>;
>alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk; intel-
>g...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
>zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan <zhiyuan...@intel.com>; intel-gvt-
>d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A <zhi.a.w...@intel.com>; Tian, Kevin
><kevin.t...@intel.com>
>Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations
>
>> +struct vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info {
>> +__u32 argsz;
>> +__u32 flags;
>> +struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>> +__s32 fd;
>> +__u32 pad;
>> +};
>
>Hmm, now you have argsz and flags twice in vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info ...
>
>I think we should have something like this:
>
>struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info {
>    __u64 start;
>    __u64 drm_format_mod;
>    __u32 drm_format;
>    __u32 width;
>    __u32 height;
>    __u32 stride;
>    __u32 size;
>    __u32 x_pos;
>    __u32 y_pos;
>__u32 padding;
>};
>
>struct vfio_vgpu_query_plane {
>   __u32 argsz;
>   __u32 flags;
>   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>__u32 plane_id;
>__u32 padding;
>};
>
>struct vfio_vgpu_create_dmabuf {
>   __u32 argsz;
>   __u32 flags;
>   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>__u32 plane_id;
>__s32 fd;
>};
Good suggestion will apply in the next version.
Thanks for review :)

Chenxg.

RE: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-05-31 Thread Chen, Xiaoguang 
Hi,

>-Original Message-
>From: Gerd Hoffmann [mailto:kra...@redhat.com]
>Sent: Monday, May 29, 2017 3:20 PM
>To: Chen, Xiaoguang ;
>alex.william...@redhat.com; ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk; intel-
>g...@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org;
>zhen...@linux.intel.com; Lv, Zhiyuan ; intel-gvt-
>d...@lists.freedesktop.org; Wang, Zhi A ; Tian, Kevin
>
>Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations
>
>> +struct vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info {
>> +__u32 argsz;
>> +__u32 flags;
>> +struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>> +__s32 fd;
>> +__u32 pad;
>> +};
>
>Hmm, now you have argsz and flags twice in vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info ...
>
>I think we should have something like this:
>
>struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info {
>    __u64 start;
>    __u64 drm_format_mod;
>    __u32 drm_format;
>    __u32 width;
>    __u32 height;
>    __u32 stride;
>    __u32 size;
>    __u32 x_pos;
>    __u32 y_pos;
>__u32 padding;
>};
>
>struct vfio_vgpu_query_plane {
>   __u32 argsz;
>   __u32 flags;
>   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>__u32 plane_id;
>__u32 padding;
>};
>
>struct vfio_vgpu_create_dmabuf {
>   __u32 argsz;
>   __u32 flags;
>   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
>__u32 plane_id;
>__s32 fd;
>};
Good suggestion will apply in the next version.
Thanks for review :)

Chenxg.

Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-05-29 Thread Gerd Hoffmann 
> +struct vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info {
> + __u32 argsz;
> + __u32 flags;
> + struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
> + __s32 fd;
> + __u32 pad;
> +};

Hmm, now you have argsz and flags twice in vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info ...

I think we should have something like this:

struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info {
    __u64 start;
    __u64 drm_format_mod;
    __u32 drm_format;
    __u32 width;
    __u32 height;
    __u32 stride;
    __u32 size;
    __u32 x_pos;
    __u32 y_pos;
__u32 padding;
};

struct vfio_vgpu_query_plane {
__u32 argsz;
__u32 flags;
struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
__u32 plane_id;
__u32 padding;
};

struct vfio_vgpu_create_dmabuf {
__u32 argsz;
__u32 flags;
struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
__u32 plane_id;
__s32 fd;
};

Re: [PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-05-29 Thread Gerd Hoffmann 
> +struct vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info {
> + __u32 argsz;
> + __u32 flags;
> + struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
> + __s32 fd;
> + __u32 pad;
> +};

Hmm, now you have argsz and flags twice in vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info ...

I think we should have something like this:

struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info {
    __u64 start;
    __u64 drm_format_mod;
    __u32 drm_format;
    __u32 width;
    __u32 height;
    __u32 stride;
    __u32 size;
    __u32 x_pos;
    __u32 y_pos;
__u32 padding;
};

struct vfio_vgpu_query_plane {
__u32 argsz;
__u32 flags;
struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
__u32 plane_id;
__u32 padding;
};

struct vfio_vgpu_create_dmabuf {
__u32 argsz;
__u32 flags;
struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
__u32 plane_id;
__s32 fd;
};

[PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-05-27 Thread Xiaoguang Chen 
Here we defined a new ioctl to create a fd for a vfio device based on
the input type. Now only one type is supported that is a dma-buf
management fd.
Two ioctls are defined for the dma-buf management fd: query the vfio
vgpu's plane information and create a dma-buf for a plane.

Signed-off-by: Xiaoguang Chen 
---
 include/uapi/linux/vfio.h | 50 +++
 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h b/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
index ae46105..308e7a2 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
@@ -502,6 +502,56 @@ struct vfio_pci_hot_reset {
 
 #define VFIO_DEVICE_PCI_HOT_RESET  _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 13)
 
+/**
+ * VFIO_DEVICE_GET_FD - _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 14, __u32)
+ *
+ * Create a fd for a vfio device based on the input type
+ * Vendor driver should handle this ioctl to create a fd and manage the
+ * life cycle of this fd.
+ *
+ * Return: a fd if vendor support that type, -errno if not supported
+ */
+
+#define VFIO_DEVICE_GET_FD _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 14)
+
+#define VFIO_DEVICE_DMABUF_MGR_FD  0 /* Supported fd types */
+
+/*
+ * VFIO_DEVICE_QUERY_PLANE - _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 15, struct plane_info)
+ * Query plane information for a plane
+ */
+struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info {
+   __u32 argsz;
+   __u32 flags;
+   __u32 plane_id;
+   __u32 drm_format;
+   __u32 width;
+   __u32 height;
+   __u32 stride;
+   __u32 start;
+   __u32 x_pos;
+   __u32 y_pos;
+   __u64 drm_format_mod;
+   __u32 size;
+   __u32 pad;
+};
+
+#define VFIO_DEVICE_QUERY_PLANE _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 15)
+
+/*
+ * VFIO_DEVICE_CREATE_DMABUF - _IO(VFIO, VFIO_BASE + 16, struct dmabuf_info)
+ *
+ * Create a dma-buf for a plane
+ */
+struct vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info {
+   __u32 argsz;
+   __u32 flags;
+   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
+   __s32 fd;
+   __u32 pad;
+};
+#define VFIO_DEVICE_CREATE_DMABUF _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 16)
+
 /*  API for Type1 VFIO IOMMU  */
 
 /**
-- 
2.7.4

[PATCH v6 4/6] vfio: Define vfio based vgpu's dma-buf operations

2017-05-27 Thread Xiaoguang Chen 
Here we defined a new ioctl to create a fd for a vfio device based on
the input type. Now only one type is supported that is a dma-buf
management fd.
Two ioctls are defined for the dma-buf management fd: query the vfio
vgpu's plane information and create a dma-buf for a plane.

Signed-off-by: Xiaoguang Chen 
---
 include/uapi/linux/vfio.h | 50 +++
 1 file changed, 50 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h b/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
index ae46105..308e7a2 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/vfio.h
@@ -502,6 +502,56 @@ struct vfio_pci_hot_reset {
 
 #define VFIO_DEVICE_PCI_HOT_RESET  _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 13)
 
+/**
+ * VFIO_DEVICE_GET_FD - _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 14, __u32)
+ *
+ * Create a fd for a vfio device based on the input type
+ * Vendor driver should handle this ioctl to create a fd and manage the
+ * life cycle of this fd.
+ *
+ * Return: a fd if vendor support that type, -errno if not supported
+ */
+
+#define VFIO_DEVICE_GET_FD _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 14)
+
+#define VFIO_DEVICE_DMABUF_MGR_FD  0 /* Supported fd types */
+
+/*
+ * VFIO_DEVICE_QUERY_PLANE - _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 15, struct plane_info)
+ * Query plane information for a plane
+ */
+struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info {
+   __u32 argsz;
+   __u32 flags;
+   __u32 plane_id;
+   __u32 drm_format;
+   __u32 width;
+   __u32 height;
+   __u32 stride;
+   __u32 start;
+   __u32 x_pos;
+   __u32 y_pos;
+   __u64 drm_format_mod;
+   __u32 size;
+   __u32 pad;
+};
+
+#define VFIO_DEVICE_QUERY_PLANE _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 15)
+
+/*
+ * VFIO_DEVICE_CREATE_DMABUF - _IO(VFIO, VFIO_BASE + 16, struct dmabuf_info)
+ *
+ * Create a dma-buf for a plane
+ */
+struct vfio_vgpu_dmabuf_info {
+   __u32 argsz;
+   __u32 flags;
+   struct vfio_vgpu_plane_info plane_info;
+   __s32 fd;
+   __u32 pad;
+};
+#define VFIO_DEVICE_CREATE_DMABUF _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 16)
+
 /*  API for Type1 VFIO IOMMU  */
 
 /**
-- 
2.7.4